Letter: Blame the media

There’s plenty of blame to go around for the government shutdown, but it’s the liberal media that’s most responsible because it doesn’t hold President Obama and the Democratic Senate accountable for their actions and inactions.

For example, a senior administration official said the following last week: “We are winning. . . . It doesn’t really matter to us” how long the shutdown lasts “because what matters is the end result.”

So Obama and his Democratic cabal in the Senate are going to hold America hostage because they know the liberal media will let them get away with just about anything.

Last week dozens of bills came out of the Republican House to keep government running. What did Sen. Jeanne Shaheen and the Democratic Senate do to keep the government running? Absolutely nothing. I admit that Obama worked real hard last week making sure that World War II veterans couldn’t see their memorial by ordering it barricaded along with other open-space national monuments and cemeteries. If Obama put as much effort as he has done to ensure that America experience as much pain as possible during this shutdown into trying to avoid it, we would be in great shape now.

Someday America will demand a responsible media where a president and his administration aren’t allowed to act like dictators. This new and responsible media will make sure that everybody is held accountable and administrations will not be allowed to get away with investigating themselves. Then all Americans will be better off.

The media was not pushing for gun control! Thanks for the chuckle Bruce. The reason it died on the vine was because quite a few Dems were up for election in states that are gun friendly.
This is what the Dems do. They seem to have a pattern of going headfirst into ideas, and then whoops, they find out they had not thought of the consequences of their grand ideas. Will this idea affect jobs, will it cut costs, etc.
The ACA is a perfect example of their thinking. 15% of folks have no insurance. So lets change this. Write a law that is thousands of pages long and hope like heck once it is past it will not have any bad affects.
Reminds me of teenagers who think they know best. Then when they do something stupid you ask them why, and their answer is always the same. "I didn't think of that" DAH!

tillie wrote:

10/16/2013

Omigod, Rabbit, I thought you were talking about the tea party and Cruz when you said "going headfirst into ideas, and then whoops, they find out they had not thought of the consequences of their grand ideas." Hopefully there are no bad EFFECTS from their grand idea to close the government and have the country default because they do no like ACA.

ItsaRepublic wrote:

10/12/2013

The letter writer is correct. The media is populated by liberals who allow their own personal beliefs to shape and form the news and the delivery is almost always from a Left leaning perspective. The national media has been the the back pocket of Democrats for a couple of decades now and I don't see that changing. NPR, PBS, NY Times, Washington Post, NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, etc. all cover the news from one perspective often leaving out any semblance of balance or fair coverage. We see it locally in the Monitor as well in the way that they cover the local news, the opinions soaking through the news and the headlines, the placement of stories and the failure of the newspapers to do the hard job of investigating things like state employees blogging while being paid by taxpayers and those employees trashing the people paying their salaries. The Monitor has added perspective to their opinion pages, that is positive, no doubt. But it is everywhere.......liberal media shaping the news rather than reporting the facts and allowing people to decide.

Bruce_Currie wrote:

10/14/2013

Or maybe, reality itself has a liberal bias. A few minutes with anything associated with the Fox 'News' network exemplifies what the poster calls "shaping the news".

BestPresidentReagan wrote:

10/15/2013

Please name any of the leftist lame stream liberal media that covered the waiver Obama gave for the ILLEGAL ALIEN march and rally on the DC mall last week - all the while barricading VETERANS from access to their self financed memorials - ya cant - they didnt

Bruce_Currie wrote:

10/16/2013

Neither post above accurately describes reality. The "media' was not driving any push for gun control--and that push from gun control advocates withered on the vine, you may recall. Both the immigration rally and the WW2 veteran rally were well covered by mainstream media. The WW2 memorial is on the mall, and protected by the park police. Those who tried to turn it into a media event with their crocodile tears were the very ones responsible for its closure--Cruz and his TP cronies in the House.

BestPresidentReagan wrote:

10/16/2013

please notice Bruce avoided answering the ILLEGAL ALIEN waiver Obama gave for their rally last week....more masterful diversion by the left

Bruce_Currie wrote:

10/16/2013

Response to sail below: The rally was in support of immigration reform, and permitted based upon the 1st Amendment . As usual, your attempt to frame the issue differently is lame and inaccurate. Stronger words could well apply.

BestPresidentReagan wrote:

10/15/2013

How about this for BIAS.....In a Gallup Poll released in the heart of the gun control debate last April (after months and month of hysterical coverage), only 4% of Americans saw gun control as a priority. What they were (and are) most concerned about is jobs, the deficit, and the overall economy. And yet…For nearly six-months the media ignore America´s priorities and obsessively, relentlessly, and shamefully pushed Congress to pass gun control.

Instead of just assuming things Bruce, you might want to get informed on a lot of health issues regarding cost.
The opposite is true about folks using the ER who are on Medicaid. In fact, they use it more. Dartmouth College is doing a study on this, why folks use the ER for non emergency issues when they could go to a physician. Many states are now charging folks on Medicaid and Medicare for unnecessary ER visits. read about it Bruce, folks are using the ER for colds, sore throats, and even diaper rash. And these are not folks who do not have insurance.
The ACA will increase ER visits. You will be waiting longer for an appointment with your Doc, so folks will use the ER more.

Bruce_Currie wrote:

10/12/2013

Perhaps you're the one who needs to be better informed. http://www.hschange.com/CONTENT/1302/

BestPresidentReagan wrote:

10/13/2013

Read this and get back to us.... Americans should remember just how many rules, standards, and traditions had to be twisted or bulldozed in order for the [un]Affordable Care Act to become law. For Obamacare to be enacted in the first place required each of more than a dozen, highly unlikely or even suspect, occurrences or actions. It then took some serious constitutional hocus pocus for it to survive in court. Consider the awful litany: spectator.org/archives/2012/07/03/obamacares-hideous-history-rec

BestPresidentReagan wrote:

10/13/2013

every reader should read this massive study that debunks the Bruce fact less narrative: The New England Journal of Medicine published results of the Oregon Health Insurance Experiment, which followed over 10,000 Oregonians on Medicaid, and found that Medicaid did not improve enrollees’ health, relative to being uninsured. It’s a game-changing event, because it upends the progressive narrative that states are obligated to expand Medicaid, no matter the cost, because the program will save hundreds of thousands of lives. http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/348287/game-changing-oregon-medicaid-study

Bruce_Currie wrote:

10/14/2013

More right-wing libertarian nonsense, making claims that are not made by the study's authors nor supported by the facts of the study. Consider: The study showed that Medicaid improves access to healthcare and gives a vulnerable population financial protection for healthcare costs. The long-term effects of healthcare--early detection of illnesses, fewer sick days, reduced mortality. Many other studies of such programs have shown their effectiveness in improving health care outcomes. There is NO debate on this in the real world.

tillie wrote:

10/10/2013

Too bad everyone doesn't watch Phony News like you guys do, or the Republican poll numbers wouldn't be so low. Phony News right up to the last minute was saying Romney was going to win. Maybe it is time to try a new channel, what that, you know, is oh what is the word I am looking for, accurate, unbiased?.

tillie wrote:

10/10/2013

Well I see the fat cat wall street investors and chamber of commerce had to take the Repubs in the back room and read them the riot act. No more money unless they stop this crazy default talk and it didn't take Boehner long to get the message and offer a 6 wk deal. Of course nothing on the shut down since that is only hurting the average American and not their billionaire donors.

Jim... wrote:

10/11/2013

100% correct....

tillie wrote:

10/10/2013

Van, Jon Stewart did not turn against Obamacare. If you ever really watched him, you would see how he has seared Republicans over the coals for shutting down the government so they can deny health care to millions. No, the thing is Van, Democrats are honest and if there is a problem they will not deny it and not afraid to exhort other Dems about mistakes. John Boehner is afraid to stand up to the 40 or 50 hard core tea partiers in his own party. That is the difference in being honest. Also Boehner wears a really, really big badge of shame, right under his crying eyes.

RabbitNH wrote:

10/10/2013

Well, I guess honestyknow has a new meaning. But in reality there is a difference between honesty, being in denial, or just plain being uninformed.
Reminds me of the Grateful Dead song "Comfortably Numb".

tillie wrote:

10/10/2013

This comment pertains to nothing, except you like the Grateful Dead.

Van wrote:

10/10/2013

Rabbit, "Comfortably Numb". is a Pink Floyd song. It is on the Album "The Wall" it came out the year I graduated High School and my Freshman Year in College. But I know exactly what you mean!!!

GCarson wrote:

10/17/2013

Well I guess you can't be all bad then, pets and good music. Lets stick to politics/religion, it's easier to be annoyed that way.

tillie wrote:

10/10/2013

For a President who can't seem to do anything right and is has no "leadership", the Repugs seem to give him a lot of power in what he can open and not open in the shutdown they made. I seem to remember early in the year, a few of you right wingers( you know who you are) blaming Obama for the high gas prices and now they are going down where is his credit for that? You want everything both ways don't you?

tillie wrote:

10/09/2013

"Lying is a badge of shame for a conservative"? That is a joke right? If not there are a lot of conservative politicians running around Washington with badges on.

Van wrote:

10/09/2013

Tillie, I could list a scroll of liberal lies: Like: You could keep your doctor. Like if you like your policy you can keep it. Like your insurance will go down $2,500. My insurance went up 33% and that number is on the low side around America.
So Tillie examples?
After today's headline in real newspapers that Obama is withholding death benefits to our lost heroes Obama will go down as the worst president ever.

Field-of-Ferns wrote:

10/10/2013

Obamacare did not require your insurance company to raise its rates. If the rates went up, it's because they've been going up every year for a decade or more. In fact, the rate of increase has slowed in the last couple years. The ACA will not be fully implemented until 2015 (thanks to delays insisted upon by the GOP), so you really can't evaluate its effectiveness until then. In the meantime, whatever your unregulated insurance company does is up to them. Have you looked on the marketplace to see if you can get a lower rate? Have you called your insurance company to tell them you're considering leaving, and ask for a better rate?

ItsaRepublic wrote:

10/10/2013

Half truth there Field-of-Ferns. The company does not have to raise the rates but they will pay about twice as much for insurance as they will offer good policies and now people working more than part time will be required to be covered. Beyond that, there is a hefty "tax" which the federal government levies on a company which offers health insurance. So companies will ask employees to share in that cost and chances are, to stay even in profits so that they can grow, companies will reduce that coverage. Next year my insurance is going up $52 but in 2015 we have already been told that it will almost double, deductibles will be higher and coverages will change (for the worse) due to Obamacare rules and regulations. Simple economics tells you that if more people are going to get subsidized for their care, others will have to pay for it one way or another. You stated that: "you can't evaluate the effectiveness until then". Why are we implementing a law that we don't know what the ramifications will be until it is too late?

Van wrote:

10/10/2013

Wrong Field, my insurance went down last year but our enrollment person listed the reason it want up and that was because of ObamaKare they called it by it's inaccurate PC name ACA.

Bruce_Currie wrote:

10/10/2013

Reply to Itsa below: "Simple economics" also tells us that in the long run, the ACA will save money, and that providing more Americans with adequate healthcare insurance will mean they rely less on emergency room care, will be more likely to receive regular care, and in the long run will be healthier. That in turn will make them more productive citizens. All of us already pay for the health care the uninsured receive, the costs may have shifted somewhat, but your overall "burden" is unlikely to change much over a longer time frame--say 5 years. In the longer run, the concept of employer-provided healthcare is going away--whether you like it or not. It was an accident of history that few other nations have, and it makes our industries that compete internationally less competitive.

tillie wrote:

10/10/2013

Excuse the language, Van, but as Jon Stewart says, the GOP has farted and looked at the dog.

Van wrote:

10/10/2013

That is cute Tillie. I know Jon Steward is a hard core leftie but he had Kathleen Sebelius on the ropes big time. When hard core lefties are turning on ObamaKare it means that Obama and the democrats who voted for it and voted to protect it are in big trouble like: Shaheen, Kuster and Shea-Porter.
http://www.businessinsider.com/jon-stewart-kathleen-sebelius-obamacare-daily-show-2013-10

Van - Jon Stewart had Sebelius on the ropes because (1) he points out that republican-led 1-year delay for businesses unfairly favors businesses and not citizens and (2) he feels the ACA doesn't go far enough. He favors a single-payer system.

Van wrote:

10/09/2013

We now know that illegal aliens are a higher priority to Obama than our beloved vets.
http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/07/obama-oks-illegals-march-on-mall-still-blocks-americans/, http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/01/obama-admin-knew-about-wwii-veterans-request-and-rejected-it/
Why isn’t Obama’s approval rating front page news in the Monitor: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/360748/oh-and-way-obamas-approval-rating-down-37-andrew-c-mccarthy

GCarson wrote:

10/09/2013

Quite a nice piece if one likes fairy tales and half truths. I am slightly amused that the media is to blame for the GOP repeatedly sending the same bill back to the senate that they had already rejected. What about the right-wing media and their claims that Obama was shutting down the ocean, funding a muslin organization (Faux News) or any other outrageous claims. This is an issue about the ACA, not about funding our government. The zealots will do anything to kill or delay healthcare reform, that even includes holding the economy hostage. The last time I looked the market was down over 900 points since this started. How about getting down to business and resolve the problem as opposed to concentrating on finger pointing. You are right thou that there is enough blame to go around.

Van wrote:

10/09/2013

Mauser, I would like for you to ID one thing isn't accurate. Since the Shutdown the Senate hasn't voted on one bill from the House. Also I will point out that the Senate did not send back the same bill that was rejected by the Senate concerning the shutdown. It is you that isn't accurate but that at least you are consistently not accurate.

GCarson wrote:

10/09/2013

The senate stripped out the ACA related BS and sent the stripped down version back, the GTP then turned around and sent the same bill back with the stripped out parts back. I consider your comment on my accuracy a badge of honor. The GTP in the house refuse to even consider a bill to extend funding without adding their partisan garbage to it. So just who is acting like a dictator and forcing their sour grapes agenda on the whole country. I will keep looking for more info regarding your above links, a simple google only returns links from what I would consider dubious sources as the daily caller is.

BestPresidentReagan wrote:

10/10/2013

Textbook behavior from the left. Cant debate the facts they demonize, destroy & smear the source

GCarson wrote:

10/14/2013

Sail - I would say that is canned response number 32. So typical, never saw a response that stays on point. Entertaining tho, try comedy central.

GCarson wrote:

10/17/2013

Sail, I beg to differ on your conclusion. Some sources don't require smearing........

Van wrote:

10/09/2013

I meant to say the house did not send back the same bill not the
Senate did not send back the same bill that was rejected by the Senate concerning the shutdown.